[kerouac]

(11-23-2014 01:51 PM)Blick Mang Wrote:  

Europe would take some hits, and Iran would be completely flattened, allowing ISIS to roll in and "pacify" their Shiite friends.

Out of curiosity, why would Europe take hits, and which countries are you talking about?

Even if Neo-Cons can convince our Israeli/AIPAC controlled congress to start a war with Iran, do you think the largely war-weary American public would play along this time? It seems strange, because even though Fox News and Republicans constantly bash Obama for not getting more involved with hands-on-the-ground forces in the Middle East, I never hear anyone in the public say anything close to that. Then again, I am on the Left-Coast of the United States, so that may be why.

In any case, I do understand with campaign finance the way it is in this country, that our congress will be openly fellating our Jewish Masterlords (AIPAC, Sheldon Adelson, et al.), I doubt the American Public, who provides most of the individual strength to the military, would be as willing to jump into another grand war. Unless, Israel is willing to do its part and just nuke Iran already and get it over with. Obviously, that won't be happening just yet.

Iran is ready for a Democracy, but I don't see it playing along with the situation in the middle east (even with a democracy) for long because Israel has become quite a sore in that country's eternal quest for power.

[kerouac]

(11-23-2014 04:30 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Watch the media coverage of the Iran nuclear talks "deadline" over the next week. I predict a dramatic declared failure by Kerry and the Europeans and blaming of Iran for not totally capitulating. Facts will be false framed, like the "tons" of "enriched uranium" Iran allegedly has.

While I, too, hear the war drums beating (at least when I watch anything on the MSM), what do you think of this article in terms of your prediction?

Iranian-Backed Shiite Militias In Iraq Just Beat ISIS In Key Battle --And That's Threatening US Leverage In Nuclear Talks

Quote:

“Iran and the U.S. have been tactically working together for a long time,” said Alex Vatanka, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington. “The Iranians and Americans are indirectly working together to fight ISIS.”

Quote:

Neither the U.S. government nor Iran will acknowledge each other’s presence in Iraq as positive because “the politics of the situation is so toxic, but the fact of the matter is that they are" cooperating, Vatanka said.

[L M McCoy]

A war with Iran must also be accompanied with boots on the ground for Iraq.

Baghdad stands because Iran is helping. If Iran goes down then Iraq loses to ISIS and I know America isn't trying to take on Iran,Syria,Isis, and any other extremist group that might pop up.

If America goes to war with Iran Israel will join which might cause Hezbollah to attack Israel. Essentially we've got the domino effect that led to WW2 happening in western asia.

Now as well we all know the European union and NATO are America's bitches so they will be pulled in as well. Going to war with Iran is essentially going to war with Russia

[Feisbook Control]

The US is not going to fight Iran directly. There's absolutely no support from average Americans. They're completely war weary after Iraq and Afghanistan. Even leaving aside the failures of those wars, the American public is well aware that "winning" a war certainly wouldn't help them. It might make some people rich, but any additional major war would bankrupt the US right now and absolutely crush the average person's standard of living.

That said, I think that the US is increasingly getting desperate and irrational in its foreign policy. It understands that its days are numbered and so has to try to manufacture a crisis in another nation before it eventually falls in a heap itself. The irony though, is that with every dumb move now (Syria, Ukraine), it actually hastens the demise of its power and that of the USD. The more the US pushes Russia or anyone else right now, the more they push those nations into creating alternatives to US world power. What has the effect been of pushing Russia in Ukraine? They've signed two large gas deals with China. They're basically moving away from the West, both the US and its allies in Europe. They know they have to or they'll always be over a barrel. Russia could have been the third corner of a triangle of power also consisting of the US and China. Instead, the US has basically forced Russia's hand because the US is trying to make everything a "with us or against us" system. Russia has been forced into an arrangement essentially as the lesser partner to China simply because they're fed up with the US' bullshit.

As such, both Russia and China are working very hard right now to establish diplomatic and financial systems that circumvent American influence and control. One such organisation is the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Iran is currently only an observer, but I expect them to become a full member before too long. What choice do they have if the US keeps pushing them? Many nations that have wanted to remain out of this global pissing match that has been instigated by the US are being forced to pick a side, and I believe they'll choose the non-US (i.e. Chinese) side.

[zidhai89]

While I don't disagree to much of what you've said the key to all that happening is the creation of an alternative to the petrodollar. It doesn't look like Putin is capable of creating such a system.

We will see, I suppose.

[Praetor Lupus]

(11-24-2014 02:55 AM)zidhai89 Wrote:  

While I don't disagree to much of what you've said the key to all that happening is the creation of an alternative to the petrodollar. It doesn't look like Putin is capable of creating such a system.

We will see, I suppose.

The more nations that the US pisses off, the more likely support for an alternative will grow, I would argue. If not from Europe, then certainly states in Asia that have not traditionally been US allies and perhaps even neutral states.

Rumour has it that Ghaddafi and Saddam were trying to create alternatives based on the gold system, hence their removal. Putin and a coalition on the east would not be so easy to remove.

The fucking childishness of the whole thing pisses me off when we could have co-operation and progress but we are still so close to our animal natures that that is still a long way off.

[Orion]

When i look at Iranian political system, economy, arms industry, i can tell you that Iran is safe and doing well. When Israel is terribly concerned about somebody, it tells you all you need to know.

[Truck'n]

(11-23-2014 05:07 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(11-23-2014 04:57 AM)zidhai89 Wrote:  

It is impossible for a war when the financial system is on the verge of a serious crisis with Japan having the capability to take everone down with them in light of Abenomics. Europe has no appetite as they chug along hoping to inject growth.

USA has a myriad of problems and quite frankly are bogged down picking fights with everyone ranging from Russia to a rag tag bunch of Islamist jihadists.

Your last point is excellent. They said then when Americans invaded Iraq the Iranians closely watched everything and their entire defense system is built to counter western strengths. You can also place a solid bet that any direct intervention will bring Hizballah to the party. Not going to be pretty at all.

It will probably never go beyond sanctions and intelligence warfare.

Ah, I left out a point. The whole Syria regime-change thing is to take out an ally of Iran and isolate and destroy Hezbollah before attacking Iran.

Syria is just prepping for Iran.

Couldn't agree more.

The US is still the errand boy for Israel.


I wonder how many US lives will be squandered to save Israeli lives this time?

[ralfy]

The issue might have to do with a weakening petrodollar, among others.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Well, if USA/Israel did decide to attack Iran, barring some sort of nuclear winter effect, why would that affect Europe? It's absolutely certain that no European country other than maybe the lapdog UK would join the dynamic duo in such a retarded mission.

If you consider the USA public war-weary, you would be shocked to see how much anti-American sentiment has built up in Europe during the last 5 years. Even the immense goodwill that Obama's election generated in 2008 has dwindled into next to nothing. I can't see any European country joining such a war and giving anyone a reason to include them in that madness.

[turuk]

Iran is the head of the snake in the midde-east.

Take for example ISIS. ISIS is gaining ground in the middle-east because of Iranian proxies that are terrorizing the sunni population.

Syria's horrors are continuing because of Iran's support for Assad. The US is not toppling Assad because Iran will use it as a card in the negotiation talks to sabotage a solution for the nuclear issue.

I think if the talks fail with Iran. Huge support for Assad opposition will go and Assad will be toppled. This will enrage Iran and they might retaliate with their terror proxies. It might get out of hand.

From the looks of it, sooner or later Iran will be smacked down. The sanctions are really biting in. Iran leadership who is no better than ISIS in terms of morals are continuing to build nuclear weapons which would create aNorth-Korea in the middle-east. That would totally destablize the reigon.

Probably there won't be an Iraq like invasion but more like a proxy war against Iran. In other words giving Iran a pice of their own pie. Ethnic Iranians only consist of 45% of the country. The remaining are minorities like Kurds, Azeri, Baloochi and other minorities. Starting independent movement will probably disintegrate Iran.

-There are 25 million Azeri in Iran that would want to join Azerbaijan
-10 million Kurds that would want to join KRG

When these groups get independence all the other groups in Iran would also want independence leaving only the interior to the ethic Iranians.

[Bad Hussar]

Not that I'm a foreign policy expert, but the Neocons have always seemed a bit unhinged to me. Listening to chatter they seem to have a bigger problem with Iran than Israel does, which is just crazy. Yes, I know America, to the Iranian leadership, is "The Great Satan", but since the hostage crisis of...wasn't it sometime in the 70s, Iran has had no direct material impact on America. Indirect effect on certain Americans foreign interests, yes. So how Neocons can have a bigger beef with Iran than Israel, which has obvious reasons to be concerned, I don't know. They (Neocons) seem to be living in their heads rather than the real world. And I'm not really buying that American neocons are essentially carrying out Israeli policy. If the Israeli's feel they need to hamper Iran's quest for THE bomb they are playing a dangerous game putting all their eggs in the one neocon basket and hoping America does their work. I just don't see it working. Iran is better much better prepared to hit back than Iraq was, and spectacularly better prepared than Afghanistan. Since the neocons have largely failed to reach their objectives in those two states the likelihood that they will succeed in Iran must be close to zero.

[Feisbook Control]

(11-24-2014 02:55 AM)zidhai89 Wrote:  

While I don't disagree to much of what you've said the key to all that happening is the creation of an alternative to the petrodollar. It doesn't look like Putin is capable of creating such a system.

We will see, I suppose.

Maybe. Still, not a day goes by at Zerohedge when they don't have a new article about this. Here are just a few issues off the top of my head:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-14...brics-bank
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-13...eral-trade If I remember correctly, there are now 22 countries that have signed deals with China cutting the USD out of trade.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-08...e-currency
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-12...native-may
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-15...nated-bond
http://sufiy.blogspot.tw/2013/11/demise-...vince.html

[Orion]

(11-24-2014 08:53 AM)turuk Wrote:  

-There are 25 million Azeri in Iran that would want to join Azerbaijan
-10 million Kurds that would want to join KRG

1. Azeri are also Shia muslims
2. Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, is of Azeri ethnicity

Persians make about 60% of population

[turuk]

(11-24-2014 09:55 AM)Orion Wrote:  

(11-24-2014 08:53 AM)turuk Wrote:  

-There are 25 million Azeri in Iran that would want to join Azerbaijan
-10 million Kurds that would want to join KRG

1. Azeri are also Shia muslims
2. Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, is of Azeri ethnicity

Persians make about 60% of population

So what? Azerbaijan is also Shia. They are hosting Israeli bases. Buying Israeli weapons. Shia for Azeri doesn't mean much. Azerbaijan is a good example. In Iran there are 25 million Azeri and Azerbaijan wants influence over that. Shia Iran threatened Shia Azerbaijan couple of times but Azerbaijan doesn't give a sh1t. Their army is stronger and more modern. Also they would have support of the people in South-Azerbaijan(occupied by Iran).

Ayatollah Khamenei is not Azeri. He was born on Azeri land and only speaks Azeri. He is Farsi by birth. Also ethnic Farsi people(Ethnic Iranian) are not higher than 47% of Iran.

Currently the tentions are being suppressed by the Mulah regime. It only needs an opportunity for the tensions to explode within Iran if given. The fact that Iran is such a totalitarian government shows there are a lot of internal problems.

[kerouac]

(11-23-2014 10:50 PM)Feisbook Control Wrote:  

As such, both Russia and China are working very hard right now to establish diplomatic and financial systems that circumvent American influence and control. One such organisation is the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Iran is currently only an observer, but I expect them to become a full member before too long. What choice do they have if the US keeps pushing them? Many nations that have wanted to remain out of this global pissing match that has been instigated by the US are being forced to pick a side, and I believe they'll choose the non-US (i.e. Chinese) side.

While this is the ultimate goal of the BRICs, without the dollar, countries like China who have placed a large bet on the American economy, would be in for a very long economic recession, which is not something they want at the scale that they are developing right now.

Right now, without America at the top, the whole ponzi scheme would crumble, and the world economy would be in for a very very long dry spell.

Also, without American Naval power, how would world trade look in the future? It is something that's hard to imagine for me, but perhaps some of the more knowledgeable RVFers can chime in.

To me, the greatest indication of the tide of American Thought as it relates to the middle east comes from the release of the book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, which was written by two American academics, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, who addressed the concern with the unconditional support of Israel in U.S. foreign policy.

I mean, in what strange universe does it make sense for a people to put aside their own interest for their supposed allies?

Where else in the world do you see imagery like this?


From the book/essay:

Quote:

For the past several decades, and especially since the Six-Day War in 1967, the centrepiece of US Middle Eastern policy has been its relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering support for Israel and the related effort to spread ‘democracy’ throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardised not only US security but that of much of the rest of the world. This situation has no equal in American political history. Why has the US been willing to set aside its own security and that of many of its allies in order to advance the interests of another state? One might assume that the bond between the two countries was based on shared strategic interests or compelling moral imperatives, but neither explanation can account for the remarkable level of material and diplomatic support that the US provides.

Quote:

...saying that Israel and the US are united by a shared terrorist threat has the causal relationship backwards: the US has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way around. Support for Israel is not the only source of anti-American terrorism, but it is an important one, and it makes winning the war on terror more difficult. There is no question that many al-Qaida leaders, including Osama bin Laden, are motivated by Israel’s presence in Jerusalem and the plight of the Palestinians. Unconditional support for Israel makes it easier for extremists to rally popular support and to attract recruits.

[Orion]

(11-24-2014 10:06 AM)turuk Wrote:  

Their army is stronger and more modern.

???

Azerbaijan lost war to Armenia. Iran won war over western armed Iraq.

Besides, Iran hosts massive industry of indigenous weapons and weapon systems, something Azerbaijan can dream of.

Quote:

Ayatollah Khamenei is not Azeri. He was born on Azeri land and only speaks Azeri. He is Farsi by birth. Also ethnic Farsi people(Ethnic Iranian) are not higher than 47% of Iran.

Khamenei holds the title of Sayyid, which means that he has direct patrilineal descent from Muhammad's daughter. Some of Khamenei's ancestors are from Tafresh in today's Markazi Province, and migrated from their original home in Tafresh to Tabriz.[11][12] Born to Seyyed Javad Khamenei and Khadijeh Mirdamadi[13] (daughter of Hashem Mirdamadi) in Mashhad;[1][14] he is the second eldest of eight children, and two of his brothers are also clerics. His younger brother, Hadi Khamenei, is a renowned newspaper editor and cleric.[15] Khamenei is of ethnic Azeri background[16][17][18][19] while one source claims that his mother was an ethnic Persian-speaker from Yazd.[20]

Quote:

Currently the tentions are being suppressed by the Mulah regime. It only needs an opportunity for the tensions to explode within Iran if given. The fact that Iran is such a totalitarian government shows there are a lot of internal problems.

There are a lot of internal problems in every modern country, all western countries included, but that does not prevent them from demonstrating power and stability when necessary. Hell, Assad is still there, and he has more internal problems than anybody.

[HighSpeed_LowDrag]

The talks have been extended for another six months: New York Times

Quote:

VIENNA — Hours away from a Monday deadline for completing a new accord to curb Iran’s nuclear program, negotiators planned to extend talks for another seven months, a Western diplomat said.

The British foreign secretary, Philip Hammond, told reporters that “some significant progress” had been made but did not provide details. He confirmed that the goal was to reach a “headline” agreement by March 1 and that the talks would continue through June.

The negotiations are to resume next month. The location for the December talks has yet to be announced, but over the past month, Secretary of State John Kerry has met with his Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Javad Zarif, in Muscat, Oman, and in Vienna.

American officials and their negotiating partners have yet to explain what progress might have been made and what gaps remain. President Obama said in a television interview on Sunday that there were still “significant” differences between the two sides.

Negotiators are trying to resolve crucial issues, including how much nuclear fuel Iran could produce, how long the accord would last and how intrusive inspections would be.

“Given progress made this weekend, talks headed to likely extension with experts and negotiating teams reconvening in December at a yet-to-be-determined location,” said a Western diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the discussions related to internal planning, before the extension was announced.

Mr. Hammond signaled last week that an extension was a likely option. But Mr. Kerry has insisted as recently as Thursday that the goal of the current round was to hammer out “the outline” of an agreement and that an extension was not under discussion.

With the deadline just a day away, however, Mr. Kerry raised the idea of extending the talks in a meeting on Sunday night with Mr. Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister. The Iranian news media had already reported that the Iranian side would be amenable to some sort of extension.

The extension had not even been announced when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel celebrated it as the least-bad outcome.

“No deal is better than a bad deal,” he said to the BBC, hours after speaking with Mr. Kerry by phone. “The right deal that is needed is to dismantle Iran’s capacity to make atomic bombs and only then dismantle the sanctions. Since that’s not in the offing, this result is better, a lot better.”

Succintly put, I think that the outcome of these talks is likely going to end up much like the on-again/off-again Israeli-Palestinian peace talks we always seem to get saddled with every few years. As it is, both the Obama administration and the Rouhani government realize that a deal is likely impossible to reach but don't want to suffer the consequences of actually having them fail. It's doubtful that Obama will be able to pass any agreement through Congress, and just as unlikely that Rouhani will be able to pass anything through the hardliners in the Iranian government structure. Hence, what you'll start to see is a series of interim agreements and pushing off of talks without ever actually reaching a full agreement or declaration of failure.

[kaotic]

(11-23-2014 11:59 AM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  

Apparently you guys haven't realized that hipsters have already invaded Iran.

[zidhai89]

(11-24-2014 09:15 AM)Feisbook Control Wrote:  

(11-24-2014 02:55 AM)zidhai89 Wrote:  

While I don't disagree to much of what you've said the key to all that happening is the creation of an alternative to the petrodollar. It doesn't look like Putin is capable of creating such a system.

We will see, I suppose.

Maybe. Still, not a day goes by at Zerohedge when they don't have a new article about this. Here are just a few issues off the top of my head:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-14...brics-bank
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-13...eral-trade If I remember correctly, there are now 22 countries that have signed deals with China cutting the USD out of trade.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-08...e-currency
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-12...native-may
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-15...nated-bond
http://sufiy.blogspot.tw/2013/11/demise-...vince.html

Yeah, I've been following what's been happening.

A collapse of the petrodollar requires a viable alternative. The Euro? Highly unlikely, JPY - Japan is a ticking time bomb, Chinese REM - Not anytime soon with the artificial controls they have in place. Indian rupee needs time.

If the BRIC nations do come out with a standard currency then it would change the picture overnight but it is highly unlikely. China needs a weak currency to have a manufacturing edge, The others would not want to artificially control it.

I think a more realistic picture is 2 or 3 globally traded currencies of equal importance i.e not a collapse of the dollar just a loss of it's hegemony.

[Truck'n]

(11-24-2014 08:53 AM)turuk Wrote:  

Iran is the head of the snake in the midde-east.

Take for example ISIS. ISIS is gaining ground in the middle-east because of Iranian proxies that are terrorizing the sunni population.

Syria's horrors are continuing because of Iran's support for Assad. The US is not toppling Assad because Iran will use it as a card in the negotiation talks to sabotage a solution for the nuclear issue.

I think if the talks fail with Iran. Huge support for Assad opposition will go and Assad will be toppled. This will enrage Iran and they might retaliate with their terror proxies. It might get out of hand.

From the looks of it, sooner or later Iran will be smacked down. The sanctions are really biting in. Iran leadership who is no better than ISIS in terms of morals are continuing to build nuclear weapons which would create aNorth-Korea in the middle-east. That would totally destablize the reigon.

Probably there won't be an Iraq like invasion but more like a proxy war against Iran. In other words giving Iran a pice of their own pie. Ethnic Iranians only consist of 45% of the country. The remaining are minorities like Kurds, Azeri, Baloochi and other minorities. Starting independent movement will probably disintegrate Iran.

-There are 25 million Azeri in Iran that would want to join Azerbaijan
-10 million Kurds that would want to join KRG

When these groups get independence all the other groups in Iran would also want independence leaving only the interior to the ethic Iranians.

Do you really believe all the lies you just spewed out?

[Sonsowey]

Iran is fighting against ISIS.

Isis is funded by our radical allies in the gulf, who are far more extreme than Iran.

[ralfy]

Related:

"How The Petrodollar Quietly Died, And Nobody Noticed"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-03...dy-noticed

[LouEvilSlugger]

I spent 2 months in Iran mostly in Kermanshah and Tehran and I met some of the most nicest and smartest men and women during my stay. Iran is probably one of the countries along with Russia and Belarus that aren't completely degenerate economically and culturally.

Iran is not the enemy (neither is Putin's Russia).

[rudebwoy]

Iran doesn't have a Central Bank, that is why they will be attacked.